Finality clause excluded rate dispute from arbitration, leaving the reference incompetent and the awards void.

Where a contract makes the Superintending Engineer's decision final on disputes as to rates and the arbitration clause expressly excludes such matters, a dispute over the rate payable for substituted stone chips falls outside the arbitration agreement. The reference to arbitration is therefore incompetent, so the arbitrator cannot derive jurisdiction from it. The resulting awards are void.

---

---

Issues: Whether the dispute regarding rates of payment fell within the arbitration agreement or within the contractual clause making the Superintending Engineer's decision final, and whether the arbitrator had jurisdiction to make the awards.

Analysis: The contract contained a specific clause dealing with disputes as to rates, under which the decision of the Superintending Engineer was declared final. The arbitration clause expressly excluded disputes arising under that clause. Since the controversy concerned the rate payable for substituted stone chips, it was a dispute of the kind governed by the finality clause and not by the arbitration agreement. The reference to arbitration was therefore incompetent, and the arbitrator could derive no jurisdiction from it.

Conclusion: The arbitrator had no jurisdiction, the reference was invalid, and the awards were void.

---